Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

This Made Me LOL

musclemom

musclemom

I Told You So ...
EF VIP
tumblr_liojvmxzLy1qbz2gro1_500.jpg
 
mrplunkey said:
My thoughts on the religion of environmentalism exactly.
Click to expand...


It's called not shitting where you eat. Did you know that despite their propensity to poop in their own hands and line up a target, monkeys do know not to shit where the eat....did you know this? fascinating huh? so what's ur excuse?
 
redsamurai said:
It's called not shitting where you eat. Did you know that despite their propensity to poop in their own hands and line up a target, monkeys do know not to shit where the eat....did you know this? fascinating huh? so what's ur excuse?
Click to expand...
 
redsamurai said:
It's called not shitting where you eat. Did you know that despite their propensity to poop in their own hands and line up a target, monkeys do know not to shit where the eat....did you know this? fascinating huh? so what's ur excuse?
Click to expand...

Awwww... I hurt your feelings by insulting your religion.

How fun!
 
redsamurai said:
It's called not shitting where you eat. Did you know that despite their propensity to poop in their own hands and line up a target, monkeys do know not to shit where the eat....did you know this? fascinating huh? so what's ur excuse?
Click to expand...

poop where you wish
 
mrplunkey said:
My thoughts on the religion of environmentalism exactly.
Click to expand...
I don't understand you.

Let's look at being "Environmentally Conscious" from this perspective:

Human beings live on ONE planet. It is the only place capable of providing us with air, food and water that we need to survive. The most critical resources -- reasonably unpolluted air and potable water -- are finite. That is a fact. Additionally, the most practical energy source (petroleum) is also finite.

At this point in time, and for the foreseeable immediate future, there are no other places where we can live. Period. That is just a simple fact.

Maybe in numerous generations intergalactic travel to seek new places to live that will provide us with the resources we need will be viable, but for now, nada.

How can being environmentally conscious be stupid? It is simply common sense to not wantonly waste and contaminate your limited, critical resources. No, they won't run out in our lifetimes, but the fact is things are going to become progressively worse for succeeding generations unless people get realistic. I honestly cannot think of anything more selfishly inconsiderate than leaving a depleted mess for the future to deal with simply because this generation chooses to ignore an unpleasant reality :whatever:

You don't have to be a tree hugger to be pragmatic.
 
watch as the witch types out paragraphs
pretty clear she's trying to convince herself too
 
still working on the paragraph
oh I see
I'll tangle with the oriental babe while you formulate your reply
 
when it dawns on people like plunkey that the sever loss of nutrition from our food supply actually cost them hundreds of pound on their bench over their lifetime...it'll finally set in. It's a simple analogy..we're all operating on 85-87 octane, barely serviceable. The human organism was meant to use much more potent gas.


musclemom said:
I don't understand you.

Let's look at being "Environmentally Conscious" from this perspective:

Human beings live on ONE planet. It is the only place capable of providing us with air, food and water that we need to survive. The most critical resources -- reasonably unpolluted air and potable water -- are finite. That is a fact. Additionally, the most practical energy source (petroleum) is also finite.

At this point in time, and for the foreseeable immediate future, there are no other places where we can live. Period. That is just a simple fact.

Maybe in numerous generations intergalactic travel to seek new places to live that will provide us with the resources we need will be viable, but for now, nada.

How can being environmentally conscious be stupid? It is simply common sense to not wantonly waste and contaminate your limited, critical resources. No, they won't run out in our lifetimes, but the fact is things are going to become progressively worse for succeeding generations unless people get realistic. I honestly cannot think of anything more selfishly inconsiderate than leaving a depleted mess for the future to deal with simply because this generation chooses to ignore an unpleasant reality :whatever:

You don't have to be a tree hugger to be pragmatic.
Click to expand...
 
musclemom said:
I don't understand you.

Let's look at being "Environmentally Conscious" from this perspective:

Human beings live on ONE planet. It is the only place capable of providing us with air, food and water that we need to survive. The most critical resources -- reasonably unpolluted air and potable water -- are finite. That is a fact. Additionally, the most practical energy source (petroleum) is also finite.

At this point in time, and for the foreseeable immediate future, there are no other places where we can live. Period. That is just a simple fact.

Maybe in numerous generations intergalactic travel to seek new places to live that will provide us with the resources we need will be viable, but for now, nada.

How can being environmentally conscious be stupid? It is simply common sense to not wantonly waste and contaminate your limited, critical resources. No, they won't run out in our lifetimes, but the fact is things are going to become progressively worse for succeeding generations unless people get realistic. I honestly cannot think of anything more selfishly inconsiderate than leaving a depleted mess for the future to deal with simply because this generation chooses to ignore an unpleasant reality :whatever:

You don't have to be a tree hugger to be pragmatic.
Click to expand...

Outstanding straw man!

It's not a matter of people who want to save the planet and those who want to destroy it.

It's a matter of people who advocate irrational, impractical, economically unfeasible solutions based on junk science and those who don't.

Taking actions based solely on belief and faith isn't science -- it's religion. And the vast majority of today's enviro-whacko movement certainly qualifies as a religion.

And here's another thing I'd like someone to explain to me: We're already over-regulated, over-governed and over-taxed. Yet enviro-whacko's constantly run to the government and courts for more regulation. If environmental pollution really is such a big problem, what in the world would lead someone to believe that our government could do anything constructive in the first place? They can't deliver our mail, balance their checkbook, rein-in corruption and graft, control health care costs, etc. etc. What makes you think for a second they can heal Mother Earth?

Here's an interesting test: Above, you cited your concern for our limited natural resources, particularly food and water. I'm going to assume you are against genocide and/or Chinese-style population control, which means there will only be more people over time. So based on your statements above, you must hate the scam of organic farming, correct? Imagine if the entire world heeded those nutjobs and immediately switched to organic methods. Productivity per acre would plummet. It would require vast new amounts of deforestation and tremendous amounts of fresh water to make-up the difference in production. Yet instead, we rely on modern technology to increase yields per acre, produce plants that are more drought resistant, disease resistant, etc. etc. God bless the Monsanto corporation.

Isn't modern science wonderful in its ability to reduce the need for deforestation and fresh water? You are completely against a changeover to organic farming, aren't you?
 
redsamurai said:
when it dawns on people like plunkey that the sever loss of nutrition from our food supply actually cost them hundreds of pound on their bench over their lifetime...it'll finally set in. It's a simple analogy..we're all operating on 85-87 octane, barely serviceable. The human organism was meant to use much more potent gas.
Click to expand...

Well God knows we all need several hundred pounds of bench in today's philistine environment. Not a day goes by where I think: "Gosh, I could be more professionally successful if only I could bench an additional 300 lbs!"

Here's a newsflash: Perhaps the reason you need the "high octane" (which is a scam) stuff is because you wrecked your body with poor choices of illegal AAS, irresponsible workouts and perpetual fogging. Plus, let's be honest here -- that little four-cylinder engine of yours you call a mind probably does need all the octane it can gather, but the vast majority of us can get up and over the rolling hills of life just fine.

:)
 
mrplunkey said:
And here's another thing I'd like someone to explain to me: We're already over-regulated, over-governed and over-taxed. Yet enviro-whacko's constantly run to the government and courts for more regulation. If environmental pollution really is such a big problem, what in the world would lead someone to believe that our government could do anything constructive in the first place? They can't deliver our mail, balance their checkbook, rein-in corruption and graft, control health care costs, etc. etc. What makes you think for a second they can heal Mother Earth?
Click to expand...

I remember what it was like before we were "over-regulated, over-governed and over-taxed", and I don't recall any businesses voluntarily doing anything to reduce the impact of their various waste products. We've seen how the "free market" deals with the environment. I don't think that going back to a time when the East River or the Cuyahoga were in danger of catching on fire is a good thing.
 
Mr. dB said:
I remember what it was like before we were "over-regulated, over-governed and over-taxed", and I don't recall any businesses voluntarily doing anything to reduce the impact of their various waste products. We've seen how the "free market" deals with the environment. I don't think that going back to a time when the East River or the Cuyahoga were in danger of catching on fire is a good thing.
Click to expand...

Then you have a terrible memory.

I'll cite one of many, many examples that hit close to home. The weight and packaging of medical plastics has plummeted over the last 25-30 years.

Here's a statistic for you: A round blue basin today weighs 68% less than it's 1985 predecessor. Why?

1) Less plastic = lower material cost
2) Less plastic = lower hold times in mold = faster cycle time
3) Less plastic = lower disposal cost for customers

Now how in the world could this have happened without our government taking the lead?

It's a miracle computers got faster, cell phones got more powerful and girls got hotter all without government help.
 
mrplunkey said:
Then you have a terrible memory.

I'll cite one of many, many examples that hit close to home. The weight and packaging of medical plastics has plummeted over the last 25-30 years.

Here's a statistic for you: A round blue basin today weighs 68% less than it's 1985 predecessor. Why?

1) Less plastic = lower material cost
2) Less plastic = lower hold times in mold = faster cycle time
3) Less plastic = lower disposal cost for customers

Now how in the world could this have happened without our government taking the lead?

It's a miracle computers got faster, cell phones got more powerful and girls got hotter all without government help.
Click to expand...

Computers and cell phones, based on the microchip, technical fallout from the Space Program.

The blue basin makes sense because cost was reduced. But what if dumping slag in the river gives a cost savings to the mill? Do you think they would voluntarily use a more expensive disposal method without being forced? Do you think the corner service station would have stopped dumping used oil in a field if they hadn't been forced? Would the auto makers have reduced emissions without the force of government smog regulations?
 
Mr. dB said:
Computers and cell phones, based on the microchip, technical fallout from the Space Program.
Click to expand...

Ahhh... the all-mighty space program. Know those space shuttles they retired a year or so ago? They were based on 80286 technology. Do you even know what an 80286 is? It's NASA leading the way.

Mr. dB said:
The blue basin makes sense because cost was reduced. But what if dumping slag in the river gives a cost savings to the mill? Do you think they would voluntarily use a more expensive disposal method without being forced? Do you think the corner service station would have stopped dumping used oil in a field if they hadn't been forced? Would the auto makers have reduced emissions without the force of government smog regulations?
Click to expand...

Of course they'd improve their products and services without government intervention. Why is a single Prius on the road? Why does organic food even exist? What about row after row of items labeled "all natural" and "fat free"? Why is antibiotic meat and free range chicken even available? I can name billions and billions of allegedly green/clean/health industries that exist even though the government hasn't mandated their existence.
 
mrplunkey said:
Well God knows we all need several hundred pounds of bench in today's philistine environment. Not a day goes by where I think: "Gosh, I could be more professionally successful if only I could bench an additional 300 lbs!"

Here's a newsflash: Perhaps the reason you need the "high octane" (which is a scam) stuff is because you wrecked your body with poor choices of illegal AAS, irresponsible workouts and perpetual fogging. Plus, let's be honest here -- that little four-cylinder engine of yours you call a mind probably does need all the octane it can gather, but the vast majority of us can get up and over the rolling hills of life just fine.

:)
Click to expand...



And yet you chose to SARMS which has an infinite less amount of safety research behind it. So sorry old man you do indeed think about this often otherwise you wouldn't be at a steroid board posting diaries of your performance enhancing escapades. What kind of fool....:lmao:
 
mrplunkey said:
Outstanding straw man!

It's not a matter of people who want to save the planet and those who want to destroy it.

It's a matter of people who advocate irrational, impractical, economically unfeasible solutions based on junk science and those who don't.


Taking actions based solely on belief and faith isn't science -- it's religion. And the vast majority of today's enviro-whacko movement certainly qualifies as a religion.

And here's another thing I'd like someone to explain to me: We're already over-regulated, over-governed and over-taxed. Yet enviro-whacko's constantly run to the government and courts for more regulation. If environmental pollution really is such a big problem, what in the world would lead someone to believe that our government could do anything constructive in the first place? They can't deliver our mail, balance their checkbook, rein-in corruption and graft, control health care costs, etc. etc. What makes you think for a second they can heal Mother Earth?

Here's an interesting test: Above, you cited your concern for our limited natural resources, particularly food and water. I'm going to assume you are against genocide and/or Chinese-style population control, which means there will only be more people over time. So based on your statements above, you must hate the scam of organic farming, correct? Imagine if the entire world heeded those nutjobs and immediately switched to organic methods. Productivity per acre would plummet. It would require vast new amounts of deforestation and tremendous amounts of fresh water to make-up the difference in production. Yet instead, we rely on modern technology to increase yields per acre, produce plants that are more drought resistant, disease resistant, etc. etc. God bless the Monsanto corporation.

Isn't modern science wonderful in its ability to reduce the need for deforestation and fresh water? You are completely against a changeover to organic farming, aren't you?
Click to expand...


1) The free market as it currently is will not do anything so where else can they go? govt is inept yes but they're inept because they're being paid to be inept.

2)U assume i would be against Chinese style pop control? Well, for now maybe cause we don't have 1B people....but in a decade probably. Maybe even sooner. We won't have a choice dingleberry.

3) We don't herbicideds,pesticies and GMO's to grow shit. We grew shit long before corporations existed. Did this slip your addled old mind? We need these current "technologies" because we'e completely ruined our farmland. Nothing can grwo without millions of pound of animal feces laid down first. This happened because we centralized our food chain. Few people now make more food than ever in the history of man. So that land yes is gone and new land does need to be cultivated which does mean trees may need to be cut down but new trees have to be planted in the old land. This really is simple stuff so i do hope you're following.

And the point about water is absolutely valid there dinglebrain, which is why people kind of sort of don't feel like oil pipelines should be running through acquiefers that supply hte majority of our farmland with water. You take out our water sources and Monsanto can make seeds that glow in the dark, they ain't gonna grow nothin without fucking water. Is this babystepping really necessary?
 
who the fuck cares about the environment, it is not going to affect any of us while we are here on this earth. The media does a good job scaring people into thinking we need the governments help...lmao global warming was a hoax, why would anyone believe anything about the environment. The only thing I wont do is purposely litter, thats about it
 
redsamurai said:
And yet you chose to SARMS which has an infinite less amount of safety research behind it. So sorry old man you do indeed think about this often otherwise you wouldn't be at a steroid board posting diaries of your performance enhancing escapades. What kind of fool....:lmao:
Click to expand...

And yet my heart and back still work... And I'm older than you as well.

Tough break, being all screwed up and still in school. It amuses me though, so carry on,
 
redsamurai said:
1) The free market as it currently is will not do anything so where else can they go? govt is inept yes but they're inept because they're being paid to be inept.

2)U assume i would be against Chinese style pop control? Well, for now maybe cause we don't have 1B people....but in a decade probably. Maybe even sooner. We won't have a choice dingleberry.

3) We don't herbicideds,pesticies and GMO's to grow shit. We grew shit long before corporations existed. Did this slip your addled old mind? We need these current "technologies" because we'e completely ruined our farmland. Nothing can grwo without millions of pound of animal feces laid down first. This happened because we centralized our food chain. Few people now make more food than ever in the history of man. So that land yes is gone and new land does need to be cultivated which does mean trees may need to be cut down but new trees have to be planted in the old land. This really is simple stuff so i do hope you're following.

And the point about water is absolutely valid there dinglebrain, which is why people kind of sort of don't feel like oil pipelines should be running through acquiefers that supply hte majority of our farmland with water. You take out our water sources and Monsanto can make seeds that glow in the dark, they ain't gonna grow nothin without fucking water. Is this babystepping really necessary?
Click to expand...

Musclemom:

I submit evidence Exhibit A. This is what all hippy libtard enviro-whackos sound like.

It's not too late for you. Is ^^^ where you really want to wind up?
 
mrplunkey said:
I'm going to assume you are against genocide and/or Chinese-style population control, which means there will only be more people over time.
Click to expand...
I am against genocide, or "euthanasia" for the sake of population control (I am in favor of assisted suicide in the case of terminal illness). However, I think "Chinese-style" population control is one of the few hopes for the future we have. The planet needs about 1/2 of it's current population to remain viable.

As for the rest of your post *sigh* ... y'know plunkey, you remind me of my ex-husband so much it makes my skin crawl. You simply exhaust me. When he had a disagreement with me he would pull apart every opinion with the precision of a vivisectionist. I would have to justify every single word of every single point. Maybe that's one reason why the rich and powerful get where they are, they just wear the rest of us down until we go "Fine, whatever, you win just please STFU." I used to cheat to lose when I played board games with my ex because he was such a sore loser, your arguments remind me too much of his desperate need to ALWAYS be RIGHT.

You're right about one thing though, industrial farming, particularly the wholesale pollution of groundwater and soil that comes with it, is major issue. Organics has it's own set of issues but unlike you, I don't know the solution, all I can say is we're doing something very, very wrong, America in particular. By the same token, pointing fingers and saying "what about their mess, what about that mess?" doesn't solve anything, even though it's all the world leaders keep doing. Everyone just STFU and agree on fixing shit, even if that means taking a financial hit. People need to stop making everything about ledger sheets, but greed usually trumps common sense and foresight.
 
mrplunkey said:
And yet my heart and back still work... And I'm older than you as well.
Click to expand...

Not as good as mine do, and i'm younger than you. lol

For the last 4 years not only have i not taken any roids, or selective androgen something or other which you think was a much safer choice (lols), i've not taken "any" supplements whatsoever. Not even multivitamins. So who's the one doing his best PED "dear diary" routine? And who's the one taking hynotic class drugs to get to sleep?

"What side effects can this medication cause?

Eszopiclone may cause side effects. Tell your doctor if any of these symptoms are severe or do not go away:

headache


pain


daytime drowsiness


lightheadedness


dizziness


loss of coordination


nausea


vomiting


heartburn


unpleasant taste


dry mouth


unusual dreams


decreased sexual desire


painful menstrual periods


breast enlargement in males


^^^Wise choice oh Solomon. Much better than something that grew naturally out of the ground that people have been using for 10's of thousands of years to get achieve the exact same result.

Now show your titties ngr. Maybe we can slap a wig and some lipstick on you and polish this turd afterall.
 
musclemom said:
I am against genocide, or "euthanasia" for the sake of population control (I am in favor of assisted suicide in the case of terminal illness). However, I think "Chinese-style" population control is one of the few hopes for the future we have. The planet needs about 1/2 of it's current population to remain viable.

As for the rest of your post *sigh* ... y'know plunkey, you remind me of my ex-husband so much it makes my skin crawl. You simply exhaust me. When he had a disagreement with me he would pull apart every opinion with the precision of a vivisectionist. I would have to justify every single word of every single point. Maybe that's one reason why the rich and powerful get where they are, they just wear the rest of us down until we go "Fine, whatever, you win just please STFU." I used to cheat to lose when I played board games with my ex because he was such a sore loser, your arguments remind me too much of his desperate need to ALWAYS be RIGHT.

You're right about one thing though, industrial farming, particularly the wholesale pollution of groundwater and soil that comes with it, is major issue. Organics has it's own set of issues but unlike you, I don't know the solution, all I can say is we're doing something very, very wrong, America in particular. By the same token, pointing fingers and saying "what about their mess, what about that mess?" doesn't solve anything, even though it's all the world leaders keep doing. Everyone just STFU and agree on fixing shit, even if that means taking a financial hit. People need to stop making everything about ledger sheets, but greed usually trumps common sense and foresight.
Click to expand...

Interesting... So a jebus nut who wants to ban abortion = telling a woman what she can and can't do with her body.

But an enviro-whacko that wants to mandate abortion = "hope for the planet"

I wish I could say that makes sense, but it doesn't.
 
redsamurai said:
Not as good as mine do, and i'm younger than you. lol

For the last 4 years not only have i not taken any roids, or selective androgen something or other which you think was a much safer choice (lols), i've not taken "any" supplements whatsoever. Not even multivitamins. So who's the one doing his best PED "dear diary" routine? And who's the one taking hynotic class drugs to get to sleep?

"What side effects can this medication cause?

Eszopiclone may cause side effects. Tell your doctor if any of these symptoms are severe or do not go away:

headache


pain


daytime drowsiness


lightheadedness


dizziness


loss of coordination


nausea


vomiting


heartburn


unpleasant taste


dry mouth


unusual dreams


decreased sexual desire


painful menstrual periods


breast enlargement in males


^^^Wise choice oh Solomon. Much better than something that grew naturally out of the ground that people have been using for 10's of thousands of years to get achieve the exact same result.

Now show your titties ngr. Maybe we can slap a wig and some lipstick on you and polish this turd afterall.
Click to expand...

I do so love the confident ignorance. Please dont ever stop with that. I quit lunesta months ago. Now if we could only get that messed-up heart of yours to fix itself...
 
mrplunkey said:
I do so love the confident ignorance. Please dont ever stop with that. I quit lunesta months ago. Now if we could only get that messed-up heart of yours to fix itself...
Click to expand...

oh i'm sure you did. I'm sure you're doing yoga and hitting the vedic breating excercises right before bed. Ooohhhhhmmmmmmm....yeah i can totally see that. :lmao:
 
mrplunkey said:
Interesting... So a jebus nut who wants to ban abortion = telling a woman what she can and can't do with her body.

But an enviro-whacko that wants to mandate abortion = "hope for the planet"

I wish I could say that makes sense, but it doesn't.
Click to expand...


There are other ways of going about these things Plunks. Like taking away tax incentives to have more children? How bout that one? How bout we stop incentivizing people to have whole broods of children when they're earning middle class wages or less. Hell you're a wealthy man and you still had too many kids....but that's cause you're a ignorant self indulged doosh who had no business ever having one child no matter how much money you made.

"IF" you're around that long, and that's a big "IF x10"...you may live to see the population of the U.S hit 400m+. That is only a decade or so away unless pop growth slows which you know it won't. We are going to run out of food. Well real food that is. We'll have shitburger though!!!!

Shit Burger Japanese Researcher Creates Artificial Meat From Human Feces - YouTube
 
i can't wait for that marketing opus btw. Can't wait to see how they rebrand shitburger and get stoops like you to eat up food, folks and fun style.
 
mrplunkey said:
Ahhh... the all-mighty space program. Know those space shuttles they retired a year or so ago? They were based on 80286 technology. Do you even know what an 80286 is? It's NASA leading the way.
Click to expand...

So? Do you think that the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs were running at a similar level of technical obsolescence?




mrplunkey said:
Of course they'd improve their products and services without government intervention. Why is a single Prius on the road? Why does organic food even exist? What about row after row of items labeled "all natural" and "fat free"? Why is antibiotic meat and free range chicken even available? I can name billions and billions of allegedly green/clean/health industries that exist even though the government hasn't mandated their existence.
Click to expand...

Those are new products that did not supplant other, less "green" options. And they are still minority "feel good" stuff, not mainstream.

Detroit was dragged kicking and screaming with every safety and emissions standard. We had industrial waste being pumped straight into the river, and up the smokestack, before the EPA. Regulation has played an important role in improving the quality of our workplaces and our lives. Perhaps you're just too young to remember what things were like before...
 
Mr. dB said:
So? Do you think that the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs were running at a similar level of technical obsolescence?






Those are new products that did not supplant other, less "green" options. And they are still minority "feel good" stuff, not mainstream.

Detroit was dragged kicking and screaming with every safety and emissions standard. We had industrial waste being pumped straight into the river, and up the smokestack, before the EPA. Regulation has played an important role in improving the quality of our workplaces and our lives. Perhaps you're just too young to remember what things were like before...
Click to expand...

you and i frequently have opposing views on stuff...but, one needs to look no further than pittsburgh...

then...

230pe.jpg


now...

35c0ab8.jpg
 
Mr. dB said:
So? Do you think that the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs were running at a similar level of technical obsolescence?






Those are new products that did not supplant other, less "green" options. And they are still minority "feel good" stuff, not mainstream.

Detroit was dragged kicking and screaming with every safety and emissions standard. We had industrial waste being pumped straight into the river, and up the smokestack, before the EPA. Regulation has played an important role in improving the quality of our workplaces and our lives. Perhaps you're just too young to remember what things were like before...
Click to expand...


Much like his choice of PED's, plunkeys memory is also selective...lols. He's well old enough to remember when rivers in this country caught on fire cause of what was being dumped into em.
 
Mr. dB said:
Detroit was dragged kicking and screaming with every safety and emissions standard. We had industrial waste being pumped straight into the river, and up the smokestack, before the EPA. Regulation has played an important role in improving the quality of our workplaces and our lives. Perhaps you're just too young to remember what things were like before...
Click to expand...

Detroit was ok when safety was a Volvo speciallty. Then Mercedes and BMW got into the act. Then the Japanese cars embraced it. That's what drove Detroit into safety -- consumers -- not the government.
 
mrplunkey said:
Detroit was ok when safety was a Volvo speciallty. Then Mercedes and BMW got into the act. Then the Japanese cars embraced it. That's what drove Detroit into safety -- consumers -- not the government.
Click to expand...

well...not to hop in bed with the lefties but, didn't the government force the manufacturer's to act because of public pressure?? i mean that's kind of the way our system (is supposed to) works, yes??
 
Mr. dB said:
I dunno. Anthropology does matter to me, if it doesn't matter to you then maybe you're just not very curious?
Click to expand...

what was that show in the 70s?
Korg 70,000 BC
I loved that show
not the one with the sleestacks or whatever
 
digimon7068 said:
well...not to hop in bed with the lefties but, didn't the government force the manufacturer's to act because of public pressure?? i mean that's kind of the way our system (is supposed to) works, yes??
Click to expand...

On safety, consumers wanted safer cars and politicians ran to the front of the parade and acted like they were leading the way.

Anti-lock breaks were an exotic feature decades before being mandated by the government. Yet according to DB, they shouldn't exist until the government forces their use.
 
mrplunkey said:
Yet according to DB, they shouldn't exist until the government forces their use.
Click to expand...


no that's actually not what he's saying idiot. Once again your lack of analytical comprehension is astounding to me. And no,left to themselves Detroit would still be making cars that catapult you out of the cabin upon impact with anything over 20mph. It wasn't until govt studies came out that stuff like airbags and seatbelts skyrocket your survival rate in a crash that people started thinkin hmmmm.....the auto industry knew this for years but they weren't going to unneccessarily increase their cost unless the govt forced the entire industry to adopt those measures.

Do you seirously not realize this? are you this stupid? You probably over 30 when these measures went in so how does someone who was still in diapers at that time get this?
 
a sensible woman to come along and tell you boys to go to your room
shit
 
musclemom said:
I am against genocide, or "euthanasia" for the sake of population control (I am in favor of assisted suicide in the case of terminal illness). However, I think "Chinese-style" population control is one of the few hopes for the future we have. The planet needs about 1/2 of it's current population to remain viable.

As for the rest of your post *sigh* ... y'know plunkey, you remind me of my ex-husband so much it makes my skin crawl. You simply exhaust me. When he had a disagreement with me he would pull apart every opinion with the precision of a vivisectionist. I would have to justify every single word of every single point. Maybe that's one reason why the rich and powerful get where they are, they just wear the rest of us down until we go "Fine, whatever, you win just please STFU." I used to cheat to lose when I played board games with my ex because he was such a sore loser, your arguments remind me too much of his desperate need to ALWAYS be RIGHT.

You're right about one thing though, industrial farming, particularly the wholesale pollution of groundwater and soil that comes with it, is major issue. Organics has it's own set of issues but unlike you, I don't know the solution, all I can say is we're doing something very, very wrong, America in particular. By the same token, pointing fingers and saying "what about their mess, what about that mess?" doesn't solve anything, even though it's all the world leaders keep doing. Everyone just STFU and agree on fixing shit, even if that means taking a financial hit. People need to stop making everything about ledger sheets, but greed usually trumps common sense and foresight.
Click to expand...

work on your sentence structure and the proper use of commas
commas all over the place
slow down
 
redsamurai said:
no that's actually not what he's saying idiot. Once again your lack of analytical comprehension is astounding to me. And no,left to themselves Detroit would still be making cars that catapult you out of the cabin upon impact with anything over 20mph. It wasn't until govt studies came out that stuff like airbags and seatbelts skyrocket your survival rate in a crash that people started thinkin hmmmm.....the auto industry knew this for years but they weren't going to unneccessarily increase their cost unless the govt forced the entire industry to adopt those measures.

Do you seirously not realize this? are you this stupid? You probably over 30 when these measures went in so how does someone who was still in diapers at that time get this?
Click to expand...

Instead of some moronic rant like the one posted above, answer this simple question:

Anti-lock brakes were widely adopted on even highly affordable cars despite not being mandatory. You've already stated Detroit would "still be making cars that catapulted you out of the cabin" unless the government had forced them otherwise. So explain why they willingly incurred higher manufacturing costs to offer ABS systems despite not being forced to do so?
 
redsamurai said:
Do you seirously not realize this? are you this stupid? You probably over 30 when these measures went in so how does someone who was still in diapers at that time get this?
Click to expand...

He's not a car guy, and wasn't following these trends at the time. It is increasingly apparent that he is completely unaware of the history of that industry.
 
Mr. dB said:
He's not a car guy, and wasn't following these trends at the time. It is increasingly apparent that he is completely unaware of the history of that industry.
Click to expand...

I remember it vividly. The first non-American car we could afford was a Volvo because my father was convinced it would be safer for her to haul my sister and me around.

Now you seem to be a professed expert on that era of cars, so explain why mean evil Detroit would incur huge manufacturing cost increases to supply anti-lock breaks to drivers even though they weren't mandated by the government?
 
mrplunkey said:
Instead of some moronic rant like the one posted above, answer this simple question:

Anti-lock brakes were widely adopted on even highly affordable cars despite not being mandatory. You've already stated Detroit would "still be making cars that catapulted you out of the cabin" unless the government had forced them otherwise. So explain why they willingly incurred higher manufacturing costs to offer ABS systems despite not being forced to do so?
Click to expand...


1) I was talking about airbags and seatbelts,but since you bring up ABS.....

2) ABS is a performance feature you dolt brain!! Airbags and seatbelts do not directly contribute to the performance of the car nor it's desireability therefore there was no value perceived in the addition of those systems.

When ABS was first introduced it was in "luxury" class cars. I honestly don't know when ABS became standard on affordable mainstream cars, but i'm pretty sure it was the Japanese who started putting ABS on their entry line cars. In any case it doesn't matter, ABS keeps your car straight when you apply the breaks. Yes it's a safety feature but it's also a performance feature and can marketed as such. Idiot. Take a marketing class.
 
Chrysler and ford started using ABS brakes in 1970, something like 10-15 years before the Japanese made it standard on all cars. Germans were doing it on luxury cars prior to that.
 
redsamurai said:
1) I was talking about airbags and seatbelts,but since you bring up ABS.....

2) ABS is a performance feature you dolt brain!! Airbags and seatbelts do not directly contribute to the performance of the car nor it's desireability therefore there was no value perceived in the addition of those systems.

When ABS was first introduced it was in "luxury" class cars. I honestly don't know when ABS became standard on affordable mainstream cars, but i'm pretty sure it was the Japanese who started putting ABS on their entry line cars. In any case it doesn't matter, ABS keeps your car straight when you apply the breaks. Yes it's a safety feature but it's also a performance feature and can marketed as such. Idiot. Take a marketing class.
Click to expand...

I always enjoy watching you talk yourself into a corner. It's entertaining when you rant the hardest hoping no one realizes you just got called out for being full of shit.

If you hadn't said such an incredibly stupid quote-worthy thing in the past, this would be my new quote:

"Airbags and seatbelts do not directly contribute to the performance of the car nor it's desireability"

Because the best part is you really believe that. Know why? Because if you did have a full-frontal impact in an accident, it certainly couldn't (1) mess up your brain any more than it already is and (2) wreck that cro magnon face any worse than it already is either.
 
So c'mon Mr. Db. Let's hear your answer.

Detroit spent billions (if not tens of billions) on anti-lock breaking systems despite them not being government mandated. What gives? Are the car companies just that generous and benevolent?
 
mrplunkey said:
Because the best part is you really believe that. Know why? Because if you did have a full-frontal impact in an accident, it certainly couldn't (1) mess up your brain any more than it already is and (2) wreck that cro magnon face any worse than it already is either.
Click to expand...


what you're describing are safety features in a car, nothing that contributes to performance numbers which is what american people care about. You sure you're not on loonies anymore? I'll repeat so we're clear....seatbelts and airbags are not performance ehancing features of an automobile. They are "safety" features. No less important in my estimation but in the U.S back in the 70's this wasn't a big deal and therefore, again, Detroit would not have adopted them until much much later had it not been for the govt. U're starting to make alot of spurious correlations, you know that right? Somethings goin wrong upstairs you should have checked.
 
mrplunkey said:
So c'mon Mr. Db. Let's hear your answer.

Detroit spent billions (if not tens of billions) on anti-lock breaking systems despite them not being government mandated. What gives? Are the car companies just that generous and benevolent?
Click to expand...


Because the japanese made them standard and marketed that POD heavily. That's why. Not hard. Take a marketing class at cybercollege cause ur vandy paper ain't makin it. <---- oh man i kill me. :lmao:
 
mrplunkey said:
So c'mon Mr. Db. Let's hear your answer.

Detroit spent billions (if not tens of billions) on anti-lock breaking systems despite them not being government mandated. What gives? Are the car companies just that generous and benevolent?
Click to expand...

So the govt hasnt' mandated ABS breaks...why would that be hotshot? Could it be because the car companies pretty much handled it on their own so govt involvement wasn't necessary? Now take seatbelts and airbags, why did those come to have to be mandated? Could it possibly be because the auto companies resisted fitting most vehicles except for their expensive models with these features? So the govt say's that's not entirely acceptable and so we have a case where the market did kind of fail and govt did kind of not fail. Would these features have eventually made into all cars, of course....but in the meantime you bet your old saggin ass that the govt saved more than a couple lives by saying y'all gotta put some seatbelts in ur automobiles even if it's a cheap low end model. Same with airbags.
 
I love watching you flip and flop around like a fish that just got hauled into a boat.

This is where you and DB differ. He's smart enough to know when he's been hooked (which is much harder than it is to hook you, which is simple). But when it happens, he just goes quiet for a bit, whereas you ramble and rant.

This entertains me.
 
mrplunkey said:
I love watching you flip and flop around like a fish that just got hauled into a boat.

This is where you and DB differ. He's smart enough to know when he's been hooked (which is much harder than it is to hook you, which is simple). But when it happens, he just goes quiet for a bit, whereas you ramble and rant.

This entertains me.
Click to expand...


well go on then :popcorn:
 
mrplunkey said:
So c'mon Mr. Db. Let's hear your answer.

Detroit spent billions (if not tens of billions) on anti-lock breaking systems despite them not being government mandated. What gives? Are the car companies just that generous and benevolent?
Click to expand...

You think your one single feature is a "gotcha"? Yawn.

It probably reduced their liability when they made it standard equipment on pickups and vans in the late 1980s. Prior to that it was available on a few top Chryslers, Lincolns and Caddys, but not even available as an option through the rest of the model lineups. The feature had been known and available elsewhere for decades before Detroit finally jumped on the bandwagon.

They had to be forced to include seatbelts, collapsible steering columns, door beams, and other safety features, so you harping on anti-lock brakes is kind of like saying "Mussolini made the trains run on time". So fucking what?
 
Trucks didn't even have crumple zones or passenger cages until almost the turn of the century.
 
redsamurai said:
Once again your lack of analytical comprehension is astounding to me.
Click to expand...

I think it's far more likely that he is aware of the red herrings and leaps of illogic he presents, he is just being disingenuous because that's what his agenda requires.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Macedog24
PSL Sale 40% Off sale - Fatloss made Easy
Replies
5
Views
260
Arabian
Arabian
Macedog24
PuritySourceLabs This is what TITANS are made of. limited-time
Replies
19
Views
2K
Macedog24
Macedog24
C
How would you make your TRT more manageable with less side effects?
Replies
13
Views
843
ceo
ceo
R
my domestic supply review off reddit
Replies
13
Views
1K
Fella Finn
Fella Finn
U
testosterone over 50
Replies
16
Views
2K
the_alcatraz
the_alcatraz
Top Bottom